Notifications
Clear all

L.Ron Hubbard and Thelema  

Page 3 / 5
  RSS

christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2208
29/09/2010 4:00 pm  

I tried to watch but the Man says you have to be a United Kingdomian to watch it 🙁
"Not Available in Your Area"
How Rude!


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
29/09/2010 5:00 pm  

So much for the "World Wide" web!


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
23/10/2010 12:57 am  
"christibrany" wrote:
I tried to watch but the Man says you have to be a United Kingdomian to watch it 🙁 "Not Available in Your Area" How Rude!

"Panorama: The Secrets of Scientology", is available outside United Kingdom here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l42UrHDx4lE

In my opinion, the seemingly bizarre behavior recorded in the BBC documentary, by representatives or agents of The Church of Scientology International, is simply due to the extremly critical importance it attach to protection, from corruption, of the system of initiation called "The Bridge to Total Freedom", which its founder supposedly entrusted it with taking care of, after his passing in 1986.

"The Bridge to Total Freedom", is a system of initiation, leading the initiate towards "the highest level of survival for the longest possible time." This system ultimately leads the initiate towards the fulfilment of "the urge toward existence as INFINITY." An urge presumed by the founder of The Church of Scientology International, to be an inherent and absolute quality of the true nature of each individual person, of being an immortal being. Source: http://www.scientology.org/what-is-scientology/basic-principles-of-scientology/eight-dynamics.html

"Fundamental to Scientology is a view of Man as a spiritual being. In Scientology, the spiritual being is called the thetan. The term is taken from the Greek letter theta [θ] for “thought” or “life” or “the spirit.” It is used to avoid confusion with previous concepts of the soul. The thetan is immortal and has lived—and will continue to live—through countless lifetimes. One is a thetan who has a mind and who occupies a body. The thetan animates the body and uses the mind." Source: http://www.scientology.org/faq/background-and-basic-principles/what-are-some-of-the-core-tenets-of-scientology.html and http://www.scientology.org/what-is-scientology/basic-principles-of-scientology/the-thetan.html


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
03/11/2010 11:10 pm  
"KingLamus" wrote:
First of all, hi to everyone! Does anyone here finds in L.Ron Hubbard's Dianetics/Scientology, or any of his other writings and/views a connection to Thelema or Magick/Aleister Crowley?

According to Scientology you are actually an immortal spiritual being, and the goal of Scientology is to return this being to its inherent abilities (i.e. freeing it from the laws of this universe) and remove it from its need to have a body. The sole source for accomplishing this is the technology of L. Ron Hubbard.

The goal of Thelema, is for the individual person to live out its 'true' inherent abilities. According to Thelema there is no dread after death, but dissolution of the body, and eternal ecstasy. That the sole source for understanding Thelema, is the writings of Aleister Crowley, is a common interpretation of 'The Comment' to Thelema's most holy text.

According to Scientology, those who miss the ultimate goal it proclaims, for each individual person, will have to live in a body again, untill the goal is reached.

Crowley seems to hint at something similar on page 593 in The Confessions of Aleister Crowley:

"If the superior is anything of a psychologist, he should be able to teach the average weakling fairly perfect self-control in three months at the outside. Neuburg improved enormously in consequence of the practice, and his final breakdown was due to a strain of racial congenital cowardice too deeply seated for eradication. He at least gained this: that he was brought face to face with this fundamental moral deficiency in his character. For the rest of his life he must expiate his infirmity, that his suffering may teach him the necessity of tackling it from the beginning in his next incarnation."

"KingLamus" wrote:
What are Thelemites opinion on Hubbard?

KingLamus, for this question, you could have used the polling option for threads on Lashtal.com.

"KingLamus" wrote:
Just wanted to know what the members here think of Hubbard.

This is my opinion: Hubbard left behind a system that is commonly misunderstood as a personality cult with him at the centre. Crowley left behind a system that is commonly misunderstood as a license to hedonism.


ReplyQuote
mika
 mika
(@mika)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 360
03/11/2010 11:30 pm  
"michaelclarke18" wrote:
Quite a coup, one of the leading lights of scientology has defected and is now giving inside information about the ''religion''.

There already are many people revealing inside information:
http://exscientologykids.com/


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
03/11/2010 11:44 pm  
"wellredwellbred" wrote:
"christibrany" wrote:
I tried to watch but the Man says you have to be a United Kingdomian to watch it 🙁 "Not Available in Your Area" How Rude!

"Panorama: The Secrets of Scientology", is available outside United Kingdom here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l42UrHDx4lE

In my opinion, the seemingly bizarre behavior recorded in the BBC documentary, by representatives or agents of The Church of Scientology International, is simply due to the extremly critical importance it attach to protection, from corruption, of the system of initiation called "The Bridge to Total Freedom", which its founder supposedly entrusted it with taking care of, after his passing in 1986.

"The Bridge to Total Freedom", is a system of initiation, leading the initiate towards "the highest level of survival for the longest possible time." This system ultimately leads the initiate towards the fulfilment of "the urge toward existence as INFINITY." An urge presumed by the founder of The Church of Scientology International, to be an inherent and absolute quality of the true nature of each individual person, of being an immortal being. Source: http://www.scientology.org/what-is-scientology/basic-principles-of-scientology/eight-dynamics.html

"Fundamental to Scientology is a view of Man as a spiritual being. In Scientology, the spiritual being is called the thetan. The term is taken from the Greek letter theta [θ] for “thought” or “life” or “the spirit.” It is used to avoid confusion with previous concepts of the soul. The thetan is immortal and has lived—and will continue to live—through countless lifetimes. One is a thetan who has a mind and who occupies a body. The thetan animates the body and uses the mind." Source: http://www.scientology.org/faq/background-and-basic-principles/what-are-some-of-the-core-tenets-of-scientology.html and http://www.scientology.org/what-is-scientology/basic-principles-of-scientology/the-thetan.html

watching it now.. thanks 😉


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 915
04/11/2010 2:34 am  

No, the Process that GPO hooked up with was a "chaos magick group" formed with members of Skinny Puppy. It was a kind of early techno / cyber magick experiment / mailing list...

This was after GPO decided he was the head of TOPY after all and not merely the "A/V arm" as PTV claimed to be. Long story short he "shut down" TOPY and claimed copyright on the "Psychic Cross" etc. A somewhat interesting history if you can bother to track it down in the old mailing list threads and TOPY Bulletins. I find it amusing that GPO has rewritten his history and written this part out...

Anyway - that Process is NOT Robert DeGrimston's Process Church which was founded by former Scientologists.

S


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
04/11/2010 9:36 am  
"wolf354" wrote:
Probably I've confused the names ... I knew that there was a Process connected with GPO and a Process connected with Scientology I just didn't knew that they where different processes, lol.
About TOPY, the story is longer than what you wrote because I was a member of post-GPO TOPY, I have an article in Broadcast 9 and the 354 on my nick is my inheritance from that period.
At present I know that TOPY as become something similar to Autonomatrix and dropped the name Temple Ov Psychick Youth.
Remembering old times ... does the Zee List continues active? I have the impression that after Infek Bin Laden's death the movement slowly faded away (but I might be wrong again).
Best regards,

What was left of the topy became Ain 23.
http://www.ain23.com /"> http://www.ain23.com/


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
18/11/2010 10:02 pm  
"Azidonis" wrote:
Short version: L. Ron Hubbard is a joke.

Well, after living for around half a year at the only working lodge left in the world, under Aleister Crowley's control, after Crowley's joke of an atempt at founding a worldwide religion, " [...] Hubbard was about to begin the greatest work of his life. Succeeding exactly where Crowley had failed, he would found a worldwide religion. " [...] "While Crowley struggled throughout his life to popularize the OTO, the Church of Scientology became hugely successful, [...]" "[...] and Hubbard's numerous writings are central to its success. It is, in short, everything Crowley had wanted the OTO to be." Source: George Pendle's Strange Angel - The Otherworldly Life of Rocket Scientists John Whiteside Parsons, 2005 edition, page 271, and page 273.

"Walterfive" wrote:
No connection of Scientology with Thelema whatsoever, other than the most tenuous. Ron's bunko game has nothing in common with "Do what thou Wilt."

"It is hard to ignore certain similarities between Crowley's Thelema and Hubbard's Scientology. Both religions" [...] [were founded by] [...] "charismatic men with logorrheic tendencies. Both religions preach that" [...] [our] [...] "capabilities are unlimited, and that" [...] [our] [...] "spiritual salvation depends upon" [...] "attainment of a "brotherhood with the universe"". Source: George Pendle's Strange Angel - The Otherworldly Life of Rocket Scientists John Whiteside Parsons, 2005 edition, page 273.

AC and LRH are also resembling each other, in AC using the achievement of liberty, and in LRH using the achievement of freedom, as sales pitches for their respective systems. LRH and his Church of Scientology's use of branding and exclusion of certain individuals as SP's (= "Suppressive Persons"), resembles AC's insistence in 'The Comment', contained in all editions of his religion's most holy document, of branding and excluding certains individuals as CP's (= "centres of pestilence").

Page 421 in Richard Kaczynski's Perdurabo, Revised and Expanded: The Life of Aleister Crowley, describes AC successfully branding and excluding Leah Hirsig as a "centre of pestilence", despite the fact she was at that time supposedly living a life according to his teachings on Thelema. This made Leah Hirsig in disgust, renounce both the Beast Aleister Crowley, and her title as his Scarlet Woman, on December 26, 1929.

Another similarity is AC in Liber Oz - published in 1941 during WWII, and derived from his 'Rights of Man' contained within the so called 'New Comment' to The Book of the Law, written by him in 1921 - stating that; "5. Man has the right to kill those who would thwart these rights." Source: http://hermetic.com/crowley/libers/lib77.html

Later on in 1954, L. Ron Hubbard wrote and issued 'The Code of Honor' - which is now the ethical code of Scientology - containing the following: "12. Never fear to hurt another in a just cause." Source: http://www.scientology.org/what-is-scientology/the-scientology-creeds-and-codes/the-code-of-honor.html

So when L. Ron Hubbard later on in a recorded lecture - 26 seconds within the recording hyper-linked in the source below - calles Aleister Crowley "my very good friend", it is my impression that Hubbard does this as a sign of respect, for a person that he have found to be very useful for his own goals. Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6fwzOYoAfY - 'Hubbard on Crowley'.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
18/11/2010 10:28 pm  

Yes, except Ron was scamming fools for their money in a religion where ones success as a Scientologist is measured by the size of your bank account.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
19/11/2010 12:27 am  
"AEternitas" wrote:
Yes, except Ron was scamming fools for their money in a religion where ones success as a Scientologist is measured by the size of your bank account.

You can also succeed in Scientology by paying in form of the work you do for the Curch of Scientology, either on a full time basis, by for example actually joining its staff, or on a more or less part time basis.


ReplyQuote
alysa
(@alysa)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 648
19/11/2010 12:48 am  

Are you an agent of Scientology, Wellredwellbred?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
19/11/2010 1:38 am  
"alysa" wrote:
Are you an agent of Scientology, Wellredwellbred?

😮
After, at this very moment, having been a member on this forum for exactly one year, I have in the past experienced being asked if I have an agenda against Thelema, and now I am being asked if I am an agent of Scientology.

alysa, what do think many of the people reading English tabloid newspapers during Aleister Crowley's lifetime, thought about him, his theachings, and his followers, or about those speaking about these subjectmatters in more or less neutral terms?

The answer is no alysa, I am not an agent of Scientology, and what I write here about Scientology, is derived from reading their literature for free, sufing their sites, and by confronting actual scientologists about various critical issues. Going to my local Church of Scientology, I was told by the staff to read http://www.whatisscientology.org/ if I wanted to find out more about Scientology, and to read http://www.scientologyhandbook.org/ - if I wanted to use their religious technology for free.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
19/11/2010 2:15 am  

93,

"wellredwellbred" wrote:
"alysa" wrote:
Are you an agent of Scientology, Wellredwellbred?

😮
After, at this very moment, having been a member on this forum for exactly one year, I have in the past experienced being asked if I have an agenda against Thelema, and now I am being asked if I am an agent of Scientology.

alysa, what do think many of the people reading English tabloid newspapers during Aleister Crowley's lifetime, thought about him, his theachings, and his followers, or about those speaking about these subjectmatters in more or less neutral terms?

The answer is no alysa, I am not an agent of Scientology, and what I write here about Scientology, is derived from reading their literature for free, sufing their sites, and by confronting actual scientologists about various critical issues. Going to my local Church of Scientology, I was told by the staff to read http://www.whatisscientology.org/ if I wanted to find out more about Scientology, and to read http://www.scientologyhandbook.org/ - if I wanted to use their religious technology for free.

Anyone can do what L. Ron Hubbard did. Hell, he basically piggy-backed off Crowley's work. Crowley put the common symbols together, coherently, and Hubbard comes along (no doubt influenced by his friendship with Jack Parsons) and take the symbols, puts his own terms and spin on them, concocted some sort of mythos, and wa-la.

There is nothing "new" about Scientology. If anything, he should have been arrested for spiritual fraud...

93 93/93


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1264
19/11/2010 5:16 pm  

Anyone can do what L. Ron Hubbard did

That maybe so, but whatever anyone thinks, he had quite a powerful sense of purpose, and his influence has been significant - though in a narrow field.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
19/11/2010 5:30 pm  

93,

"michaelclarke18" wrote:
That maybe so, but whatever anyone thinks, he had quite a powerful sense of purpose, and his influence has been significant - though in a narrow field.

Agreed. Why/how do you think that is so?

93 93/93


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
19/11/2010 5:57 pm  
"Azidonis" wrote:
Anyone can do what L. Ron Hubbard did. Hell, he basically piggy-backed off Crowley's work. Crowley put the common symbols together, coherently, and Hubbard comes along (no doubt influenced by his friendship with Jack Parsons) and take the symbols, puts his own terms and spin on them, concocted some sort of mythos, and wa-la.

Azidonis, the poetic justice here is that L. Ron Hubbard beat Aleister Crowley on his own game, of using individuals and then dicarding them.

"Azidonis" wrote:
There is nothing "new" about Scientology. If anything, he should have been arrested for spiritual fraud...

If L. Ron Hubbard, to use your words Azidonis; "basically piggy-backed off Crowley's work", how is it then not something "new". And to follow up the prior important question with another important question Azidonis; As Thelema has not had any public impact even close to what Scientology has had in a clearly visible public way;

Is it your position Azidonis, that it would have been wrong for Thelema, (yes I know this is a clearly hypothetical question), if Aleister Crowley had agreed with L. Ron Hubbard, to make the latter his authorized successor, and Thelema had as much public imapct today, as Scientology has? Would it then be rejected automatically by you Azidonis, as something to popular and common for your taste?

L. Ron Hubbard was cold, clever and calculating enough, to know that he was obviously not going to face any legal consequences for what he did. And who would have had any serious support for Aleister Crowley in any hypothetical public court case. L. Ron Hubbard would have confronted the publicly vilified Aleister Crowley, using his charm and his status as a former US Navy officer and war veteran.

Later on L. Ron Hubbard made dead certain that his religion would have a bettert protection than Aleister Crowley's Thelema.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
19/11/2010 6:24 pm  

93,

"wellredwellbred" wrote:
"Azidonis" wrote:
Anyone can do what L. Ron Hubbard did. Hell, he basically piggy-backed off Crowley's work. Crowley put the common symbols together, coherently, and Hubbard comes along (no doubt influenced by his friendship with Jack Parsons) and take the symbols, puts his own terms and spin on them, concocted some sort of mythos, and wa-la.

Azidonis, the poetic justice here is that L. Ron Hubbard beat Aleister Crowley on his own game, of using individuals and then dicarding them.

I wouldn't exactly say that's a quality to be proud of...

"Azidonis" wrote:
There is nothing "new" about Scientology. If anything, he should have been arrested for spiritual fraud...

If L. Ron Hubbard, to use your words Azidonis; "basically piggy-backed off Crowley's work", how is it then not something "new". And to follow up the prior important question with another important question Azidonis; As Thelema has not had any public impact even close to what Scientology has had in a clearly visible public way;

I suppose the recent polls where people are wanting "less government, more personal responsibility" (whether they actually get it or not) is no indication of visible impact...

Is it your position Azidonis, that it would have been wrong for Thelema, (yes I know this is a clearly hypothetical question), if Aleister Crowley had agreed with L. Ron Hubbard, to make the latter his authorized successor, and Thelema had as much public imapct today, as Scientology has?

Look at the type of people that Scientology attracts. If I wanted to be associated with that type of person I would be a Scientologist.

Thelema is Thelema, Scientology is Scientology. I just happen to think the latter is a bunch of horse shit, and this after getting the full "run down" from within a Scientology place (whatever they call them).

Would it then be rejected automatically by you Azidonis, as something to popular and common for your taste?

Its rejected by me due to the manner in which it was created. A fiction writer decided he could make a lot of money and attract a lot of people by creating a new religion. It's a scam, in my opinion.

It has nothing to do with being popular and common. If Thelema were to all of a sudden be the norm for the human populace I would be quite fine with it, as long as it continued producing Adepts, and Adepts continued to lead the charge. As soon as the television Evangelists or Crowley-ites tried to hop in, I would simply become more of a hermit.

L. Ron Hubbard was cold, clever and calculating enough, to know that he was obviously not going to face any legal consequences for what he did. And who would have had any serious support for Aleister Crowley in any hypothetical public court case. L. Ron Hubbard would have confronted the publicly vilified Aleister Crowley, using his charm and his status as a former US Navy officer and war veteran.

Are you saying that Goldman-Sachs was right in what they did because they found loopholes in the man-made laws?

Later on L. Ron Hubbard made dead certain that his religion would have a bettert protection than Aleister Crowley's Thelema.

Aleister Crowley was a Master... L. Ron Hubbard was a fiction writer. Crowley didn't write to make a religion. He wrote to help expound on the path of enlightenment. As such, Crowley knew that whatever he wrote would either stand or fall under its own merit. L. Ron Hubbard, on the other hand, begged/borrowed/stole whatever he could in order to make this "mythos" appealing to the public. It's a scam. The only reason the system even stands halfway up is due to the core parts he took, parts which no man can copyright.

93 93/93


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
20/11/2010 5:01 am  

Hope this is not to long for you, as in what you describe as a "wall of words", or to short for you, as in: Thelema = Moral relativism.

"Azidonis" wrote:
Look at the type of people that Scientology attracts. If I wanted to be associated with that type of person I would be a Scientologist.

Are you here belitteling those attracted to the Scientology related to LRH, in comparison to those attracted to the Thelema related to AC?

"Azidonis" wrote:
Are you saying that Goldman-Sachs was right in what they did because they found loopholes in the man-made laws?

No, man-made laws are of minimal or no relevance to L. Ron Hubbard possibly being inspired by Aleister Crowley, as a main purpose of AC's writings for the Thelema related to him, was to help his fellow beings in finding their so called true will. If much of AC's Thelema was an inspiration for L. Ron Hubbard, in the latter finding and doing his true will by developing what eventually became Scientology, then AC helped L. Ron Hubbard, and then this is one example of AC succeeding with a main purpose of his books on Thelema, namley of helping others. And who are you Azidonis, to decide that one can not find and do one's 'true will' within the Scientology related to LRH?

Maybe L. Ron Hubbard actually experienced himself as being helped by AC through the latter's books on Thelema, and maybe this was a reason for L. Ron Hubbard in a recorded lecture, (on youtube called 'Hubbard on Crowley'), later describing AC as "my very good friend". But there is little 'evidence' to indicate that L. Ron Hubbard lifted and copied most of AC's Thelema, and just changed the name.

"Azidonis" wrote:
Crowley didn't write to make a religion. He wrote to help expound on the path of enlightenment. As such, Crowley knew that whatever he wrote would either stand or fall under its own merit.

This is fair enough as your subjective opinion. My plausible and general impression after close reading of AC's Confessions, is that AC made up his story about his The Book of the Law being received from divine origins, exactly for the purpose of making a religion. And that this religion had the benign purpose of also helping the majority of persons - with little or no inclination for achieving enlightenment on their own, or for finding their true will on their own - by creating an environment for them to live in, which was informed by the benign influence of enlightened adepts. This benign environment, and how AC envisioned it, are covered in some more detail on this forum, in the 20 page thread called 'Politics and Thelema', containing many postings from our well-informed - on matters regarding details about Aleister Crowley - fellow member Patriarch156.

"Azidonis" wrote:
L. Ron Hubbard, on the other hand, begged/borrowed/stole whatever he could in order to make this "mythos" appealing to the public. It's a scam. The only reason the system even stands halfway up is due to the core parts he took, parts which no man can copyright.

One might also suggest that AC made up the story around the 1904 reception of The Book of the Law in the Egyptian capital Cairo, "in order to make this "mythos" appealing to the public."

That Aleister Crowley's social skills were questionable, and his business skills non-existent, as stated by Bill Heidrick 1 minute and 12 seconds into the hyper-link below, left him with a huge disadvantage compared with L. Ron Hubbard, in establishing a successful, and economically viable worldwide movement.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJwyw06ea6A - Aleister Crowley

Ah, what an Anniversary, now for some rest!


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
20/11/2010 8:22 pm  

93,

"wellredwellbred" wrote:
Hope this is not to long for you, as in what you describe as a "wall of words", or to short for you, as in: Thelema = Moral relativism.

I just wish you would put a space between the quotes so I didn't have to go into the middle of a paragraph to find the next {quote} to grab... whatever.

"Azidonis" wrote:
Look at the type of people that Scientology attracts. If I wanted to be associated with that type of person I would be a Scientologist.

Are you here belitteling those attracted to the Scientology related to LRH, in comparison to those attracted to the Thelema related to AC?

Nope. I'm saying you are what you eat, plain and simple. You can make your own comparisons between the two types.

"Azidonis" wrote:
Are you saying that Goldman-Sachs was right in what they did because they found loopholes in the man-made laws?

No, man-made laws are of minimal or no relevance to L. Ron Hubbard possibly being inspired by Aleister Crowley, as a main purpose of AC's writings for the Thelema related to him, was to help his fellow beings in finding their so called true will. If much of AC's Thelema was an inspiration for L. Ron Hubbard, in the latter finding and doing his true will by developing what eventually became Scientology, then AC helped L. Ron Hubbard, and then this is one example of AC succeeding with a main purpose of his books on Thelema, namley of helping others.

Did he give Crowley credit for this assistance (assuming he received it in some way)?

And who are you Azidonis, to decide that one can not find and do one's 'true will' within the Scientology related to LRH?

I never said one couldn't do one's Will as a Scientologist. In fact, I don't believe I gave any indications that the system was not viable... only that it was plagiarized.

Maybe L. Ron Hubbard actually experienced himself as being helped by AC through the latter's books on Thelema, and maybe this was a reason for L. Ron Hubbard in a recorded lecture, (on youtube called 'Hubbard on Crowley'), later describing AC as "my very good friend". But there is little 'evidence' to indicate that L. Ron Hubbard lifted and copied most of AC's Thelema, and just changed the name.

"My very good friend who did all the work and then let me copy his test answers so we could both make an A..." That kind of very good friend?

"Azidonis" wrote:
Crowley didn't write to make a religion. He wrote to help expound on the path of enlightenment. As such, Crowley knew that whatever he wrote would either stand or fall under its own merit.

This is fair enough as your subjective opinion. My plausible and general impression after close reading of AC's Confessions, is that AC made up his story about his The Book of the Law being received from divine origins, exactly for the purpose of making a religion. And that this religion had the benign purpose of also helping the majority of persons - with little or no inclination for achieving enlightenment on their own, or for finding their true will on their own - by creating an environment for them to live in, which was informed by the benign influence of enlightened adepts. This benign environment, and how AC envisioned it, are covered in some more detail on this forum, in the 20 page thread called 'Politics and Thelema', containing many postings from our well-informed - on matters regarding details about Aleister Crowley - fellow member Patriarch156.

Cool...

"Azidonis" wrote:
L. Ron Hubbard, on the other hand, begged/borrowed/stole whatever he could in order to make this "mythos" appealing to the public. It's a scam. The only reason the system even stands halfway up is due to the core parts he took, parts which no man can copyright.

One might also suggest that AC made up the story around the 1904 reception of The Book of the Law in the Egyptian capital Cairo, "in order to make this "mythos" appealing to the public."

What if he did? What if Crowley's entire body of writing throughout his whole life was designed to be one big prank?

That Aleister Crowley's social skills were questionable, and his business skills non-existent, as stated by Bill Heidrick 1 minute and 12 seconds into the hyper-link below, left him with a huge disadvantage compared with L. Ron Hubbard, in establishing a successful, and economically viable worldwide movement.

I'm going to create a religion called Msiaduj, and write two books called Harot and Dumlat. I'm going to use the models of Judaism, and take directly from the Torah and the Talmud, and give no credit where it is due. Then, I am going to use my social and marketing skills to make it a "successful worldwide movement". According to you, if I had more followers than Judaism by doing that, my religion would be more successful than Judaism regardless of whether or not I plagiarized the material.

Here is the only question that in my mind is necessary...

Crowley listed a number of Magi, among whom were Moses, Lao Tzu, Buddha, and Mohammad. He listed these as being Magi, that is, all of them were at least a Magus 9=2 capable of proclaiming a Word. Though each of them did proclaim a Word, each of these words contained a certain magickal formula which was the premise for the entire system. Further, not one of them uttered a word that was against the original Word of the Aeon in which they were Working.

Crowley claimed himself to be a Magus, whose Word was Thelema. There have been other Magi after him, each with their own Words, but none of those Words against the Word of Thelema.

George Lucas created a product called Star Wars. Through his social and business skills he has become pound for pound more "successful" than any other religion, and did so in a shorter period of time, and without violence. Some people would even call Jedi a religion. By your reasoning, George Lucas was more successful than Moses, Lao Tzu, Buddha, and Mohammad up until this point. Does that then make Lucas into a Magus?

I put L. Ron Hubbard into the same category as George Lucas, and do no think that either of them are actual Magi. Further, I do not believe that material success is indicated by the shear number of followers, the money that is made, or the overall popularity of the contents in question.

The only thing I really care about is if the system allows for two main events, the Angel and the Abyss. If it does, then fine. If people have success with those two attainments, then fine. It is a measurable proof of the validity of the system in some way.

On a material note, plagiarism is plagiarism. I'm not saying that Hubbard owes Crowley millions of dollars. I'm saying that Hubbard's ideas and techniques are nothing new, nothing that has been done for thousands of years. At least Crowley cited his sources...

93 93/93


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1264
20/11/2010 8:57 pm  

David Miscavige looks scary to me.


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 3879
20/11/2010 11:29 pm  
"wellredwellbred" wrote:
No, man-made laws are of minimal or no relevance to L. Ron Hubbard possibly being inspired by Aleister Crowley, as a main purpose of AC's writings for the Thelema related to him, was to help his fellow beings in finding their so called true will. If much of AC's Thelema was an inspiration for L. Ron Hubbard, in the latter finding and doing his true will by developing what eventually became Scientology, then AC helped L. Ron Hubbard, and then this is one example of AC succeeding with a main purpose of his books on Thelema, namley of helping others. And who are you Azidonis, to decide that one can not find and do one's 'true will' within the Scientology related to LRH?]

At the time of researching for an article on Parsons, it was my impression that the extent of Hubbard's interest in Crowley was observing that people sent money to the great guru across the water. It was there and then, I think, that Hubbard thought that here was a model he might utilise. The rest, as they say, is history.

Best wishes,

Michael.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
20/11/2010 11:33 pm  

Lucas also had contact with Manly P. Hall who had much knowledge of the mysteries.


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2208
21/11/2010 1:27 am  

and even l ron hubbard didnt like the e-meters. he thought they were a stupid gimmick. he was more into the talk and Work side of the system. it was yet another thing in addition to the concept of Subversive Persons that was blown out of proportion after he died and made more important than he visualised. Scientology in terms of tech has a lot in common with Daoist qi gong and meditation as well as certain visualisation techniques and astral projection which was taken out after his death, that works well regardless of if you want to label it Magick, Self Empowerment, Visualisation, Scientology, or Transcendental meditation.
Any age old system of spiritual practice is around so long because it works. I think this is just another case of people usurping a system that is or was originally effective in improving people spiritually and turning it into a money making enterprise for control and power. Just like Xtianity and even Judaism and Buddhism (Buddhist converts from China and Tibet invaded native Tibet killing and displacing the native Bonpo religion for one thing). To name but a few.
I think Hubbard also wanted to make money off it yes but i think he did good research in founding a system that originally helped people. The concept of engrams is the same as latent bad or blocked qi , which can be worked out with the expression of the blocked emotions and energy, much like acupuncture and even Freudian therapy work.
hooray for humans mucking up things as usual.


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 915
21/11/2010 4:51 am  
"zardoz" wrote:
Lucas also had contact with Manly P. Hall who had much knowledge of the mysteries.

really? I didn't know this but it makes sense since Manly P Hall was right on the hill betwen Los Feliz and Hollywood - still is to this day. I need to find out more aboutt his. I have a special interest in the occult Hollywood nexus.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
21/11/2010 9:29 am  
"MichaelStaley" wrote:
At the time of researching for an article on Parsons, it was my impression that the extent of Hubbard's interest in Crowley was observing that people sent money to the great guru across the water. It was there and then, I think, that Hubbard thought that here was a model he might utilise. The rest, as they say, is history.

"It was not particularly surprising that the man who should fall most thorougly under Hubbard's spell was Parson's. Enamored of Hubbard's life of adventure, he offered him a bed in the main building, sharing a room with the gadfly Himmel. Soon Hubbard was absorbed quite happily in the house's activities. When he was not writing, he spent much time in the company of Parsons, who excitedly explained to him the laws and sanctions of Thelema. Hubbard impressed Parsons with his immediate understanding of Crowley's work and with his insight - most likely garnered through his years of fantasy writing - into magic in general. Parsons wrote excitedly to Crowley to tell him about his new friend and prospect." Source: George Pendle's Strange Angel - The Otherworldly Life of Rocket Scientist John Whiteside Parsons, pages 254 and 255.

"Azidonis" wrote:
The only thing I really care about is if the system allows for two main events, the Angel and the Abyss. If it does, then fine. If people have success with those two attainments, then fine. It is a measurable proof of the validity of the system in some way.

Yes Azidonis, "Bill Gates' products" can be used in useful and productive ways, but they are not for free, and their source-codes are protected. Shareware products, like Linux, can also be used in useful and productive ways, they are for free, and their source-codes are not protected. If L. Ron Hubbard's Scientology is akin to "Bill Gates' products", and Aleister Crowley's Thelema is akin to shareware products, like Linux, they are obviously both just different ways to the same usefulness and productivity.

"Azidonis" wrote:
On a material note, plagiarism is plagiarism. I'm not saying that Hubbard owes Crowley millions of dollars. I'm saying that Hubbard's ideas and techniques are nothing new, nothing that has been done for thousands of years. At least Crowley cited his sources...

So what if L. Ron Hubbard plagiarised Aleister Crowley? For Aleister Crowley the highest attainment was useless except in reference to the convenience of an intelligence who was not in any way involved in the individuality of its instrument (Confessions page 654). So why should he care if L. Ron Hubbard in a different way, helped him in "his work" of bringing enlightenment to humanity, without giving Aleister Crowley's individuality credit? For Aleister Crowley that should just be one more "manifestation of the Universal Mind whose thought must be sterile unless sown broadcast to blossom and bear fruit in every acre of God's vineyard" (Confessions page 505).


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
21/11/2010 9:38 am  

93,

"wellredwellbred" wrote:
"MichaelStaley" wrote:
At the time of researching for an article on Parsons, it was my impression that the extent of Hubbard's interest in Crowley was observing that people sent money to the great guru across the water. It was there and then, I think, that Hubbard thought that here was a model he might utilise. The rest, as they say, is history.

"It was not particularly surprising that the man who should fall most thorougly under Hubbard's spell was Parson's. Enamored of Hubbard's life of adventure, he offered him a bed in the main building, sharing a room with the gadfly Himmel. Soon Hubbard was absorbed quite happily in the house's activities. When he was not writing, he spent much time in the company of Parsons, who excitedly explained to him the laws and sanctions of Thelema. Hubbard impressed Parsons with his immediate understanding of Crowley's work and with his insight - most likely garnered through his years of fantasy writing - into magic in general. Parsons wrote excitedly to Crowley to tell him about his new friend and prospect." Source: George Pendle's Strange Angel - The Otherworldly Life of Rocket Scientist John Whiteside Parsons, pages 254 and 255.

"Azidonis" wrote:
The only thing I really care about is if the system allows for two main events, the Angel and the Abyss. If it does, then fine. If people have success with those two attainments, then fine. It is a measurable proof of the validity of the system in some way.

Yes Azidonis, "Bill Gates' products" can be used in useful and productive ways, but they are not for free, and their source-codes are protected. Shareware products, like Linux, can also be used in useful and productive ways, they are for free, and their source-codes are not protected. If L. Ron Hubbard's Scientology is akin to "Bill Gates' products", and Aleister Crowley's Thelema is akin to shareware products, like Linux, they are obviously both just different ways to the same usefulness and productivity.

"Azidonis" wrote:
On a material note, plagiarism is plagiarism. I'm not saying that Hubbard owes Crowley millions of dollars. I'm saying that Hubbard's ideas and techniques are nothing new, nothing that has been done for thousands of years. At least Crowley cited his sources...

So what if L. Ron Hubbard plagiarised Aleister Crowley? For Aleister Crowley the highest attainment was useless except in reference to the convenience of an intelligence who was not in any way involved in the individuality of its instrument (Confessions page 654). So why should he care if L. Ron Hubbard in a different way, helped him in "his work" of bringing enlightenment to humanity, without giving Aleister Crowley's individuality credit? For Aleister Crowley that should just be one more "manifestation of the Universal Mind whose thought must be sterile unless sown broadcast to blossom and bear fruit in every acre of God's vineyard" (Confessions page 505).

I'm just simply not going to address this post except to say that I refuse to pick apart your lack of spacing in the quotations. It's tedious work that you can easily do yourself.

93 93/93


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 3879
21/11/2010 11:15 am  
"wellredwellbred" wrote:
"It was not particularly surprising that the man who should fall most thorougly under Hubbard's spell was Parson's. Enamored of Hubbard's life of adventure, he offered him a bed in the main building, sharing a room with the gadfly Himmel. Soon Hubbard was absorbed quite happily in the house's activities. When he was not writing, he spent much time in the company of Parsons, who excitedly explained to him the laws and sanctions of Thelema. Hubbard impressed Parsons with his immediate understanding of Crowley's work and with his insight - most likely garnered through his years of fantasy writing - into magic in general. Parsons wrote excitedly to Crowley to tell him about his new friend and prospect." Source: George Pendle's Strange Angel - The Otherworldly Life of Rocket Scientist John Whiteside Parsons, pages 254 and 255.

Though not having read the book from which you quote, I am aware of all this, thankyou. I'm not interested in the gullibility of Parsons in falling hook, line and sinker for Hubbard. My point was simply that I doubt that Hubbard had any real interest in Crowley's work, but liked the idea of followers giving him money.

Best wishes,

Michael.


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1264
21/11/2010 12:04 pm  

and even l ron hubbard didnt like the e-meters

The e-meter is actually a rather unsophisticated lie detector. An e-meter test is therefore a device to deterimine the sincerity of the subject, and which [personal] issues can exploited to the benefit of the ''religion''.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
21/11/2010 12:07 pm  
"Azidonis" wrote:
I'm just simply not going to address this post except to say that I refuse to pick apart your lack of spacing in the quotations. It's tedious work that you can easily do yourself.

Fair enough Azidonis, at least you do not contradict your own logic and reasoning, where the only thing you really care about "is if the system allows for two main events, the Angel and the Abyss."


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
21/11/2010 2:35 pm  

Sorry for this double-posting.

Something on L. Ron Hubbard's system's definition of an individual's true or inherent nature, with resemblance to Aleister Crowley's concept of the transcendent Will, according to the latter inherent in any individual's true nature. In Crowley's system an idividual's transcendent Will is activated in the process of transcendence, the events by which an individual's awareness transforms from an individualized state into a transcendental or "enlightened" state. Crossing the Abyss, is Crowley's term for this process. (The uderlining in the following quoted text was added by me:)

"In the textbook which accompanied the Philadelphia lectures, Hubbard outlined his basic concepts of human nature and relationship to the universe. Hubbard's cosmology defined life as a "static" which he called *theta*. Rather than the classic equilibrium of forces, this static represents a zero-condition of pure potential. Theta, he postulated, is capable of creating motion; the ensuing kinetic condition is energy condensing in space through time to become matter. The interplay between theta and its creation results in the activity of life and life forms. Thus, "thetan" [...] became his shorthand for a life form with unlimited potential."

(I had a psychedelically-induced meditation which informed me of much the same understanding ... I suggest, dear, that you study the meaning of The Fool card in the Tarot for one classical symbolization of "Theta" ... one who embodies the meaning of the Fool is an "Operating Thetan" to my mind ... but note that the Fool's secret weapon is his amusement. Where is the amusement within Scientology? Maybe it's there, but I have yet to see evidence of it from my outsider's view. Its adherents certainly seem to take themselves quite seriously.)

It seems to me that LRH's contribution was not so much in terms of novel *concepts*, but in useful technical terminology (shorthand) for pre-existing concepts. This is, it turns out, no small contribution; before we can make mental leaps from a foundation in spiritual ideas, we need names for these ideas, words from which we can build mental pictures, words which render these complex concepts into concise symbolic form. Some of these words are new, and some are commonplace but given special emphasis to enlighten our understanding. Words like mockup, havingness, affinity, theta, valence, enthusiasm, etc. allow us to converse about and convey complex concepts rapidly."

Source: http://lunaetrope.blogspot.com - Lunaetrope's Technical Manual for the Soul.

Plausibly written by someone with experience from the Berkeley Psychic Institute, the Seminary of the Church of Divine Man, in California, USA. Outside of what I have quoted from it, this source contains quotes from The Book of the Law, and a statement claiming that Lewis S. Bostwick who founded the Berkeley Psychic Institute in 1973, "embodied A.C's message much more faithfully than did Hubbard, who claimed to be a "friend" of Crowley."


Aleister Crowley mentioning thy transcendent Will in LIBER CL (Book 150), in its chapter 'I OF LIBERTY':

"Thou dost incorporate so many elements, thou art the fruit of so many aeons of labour, thou art fashioned thus as thou art, and not otherwise, for some colossal End. Nerve thyself, then, to seek it and to do it. Naught can satisfy thee but the fulfilment of thy transcendent Will, that is hidden within thee. For this, then, up to arms! Win thine own Freedom for thyself! Strike hard!"

Source: http://www.skepticfiles.org/mys3/lib-0150.htm


ReplyQuote
anarchistbanjo
(@anarchistbanjo)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 98
23/12/2010 2:44 am  

An interesting topic and my first real post here! Years ago I spent my tax return on Dianetics processing and quickly reached a point called a dianetics release. That simply meant I was not "Clear" but there was no more readily available material for the present. I then took the rest of my refund money and took several of their classes. The classes were excellent and the dianetics processing was able to root out things that no other kind of therapy was able to. Very powerful stuff.

Having said that, I was only able to extricate myself from them with extreme difficulty. They are indeed a cult and obsessed with their own technique. I can not recommend them to the weak or faint hearted.

Sigmund Freud invented free association and it is still considered one of the best forms of therapy although it takes years. Free association and kabalistic linking is very similar. This is the link you are talking about. L. Ron Hubbard improved upon Freud's free association by "going back to a remembered instance of pain to release the emotional energy trapped in engrams. Dianetics processing remains one of the most effective ways of releasing and recovering repressed emotional energy.

However, tantric sex practices where orgasm is prolonged and the energy circulated through the body is infinitely superior and bursts through those same repressed emotions as if they were warm butter. If one has not connected with their HGA there is a very real danger of going insane.

Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung and Wilhelm Reich all believed sexual energy was the energy that fueled neurosis.

The kabalistic tree was the linked thought associations that allowed these released energies to rise an the toxins to be released. Crowley took kabalistic linking of associated thoughts and combined them with tantric sex practices for a much more profound and faster development.

-joe


ReplyQuote
anarchistbanjo
(@anarchistbanjo)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 98
24/12/2010 1:44 am  

I thought of another link between crowley and L. Ron Hubbard. It is a little obscure but profound in its own way since it involves 9th degree material.

When I moved back to Minnesota from Phoenix I tried connecting to a local Scientology group. I tried getting some more processing, this time with an E-meter. My hands were too cold and not enough energy was coming through for the meter to work correctly. We tried several times and then the person working with me sent me out for a protein shake with a raw egg in it. She said she wasn'treally supposed to talk about it since it was high level stuff but it would help give me the energy I needed for the meter to work.

Crowley was a strong advocate of eating sexual fluids as an elixor and energy giver. Eating raw egg and other things like sprouts and bee pollen share the same concept. Peter Koenig refers to this OTO sperm/sexual fluid eating process as providing a type of gnosis.

In any case this use of living food as an energy giver it shared and part of ninth degree material.


ReplyQuote
Q789
 Q789
(@q789)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 29
24/12/2010 4:49 pm  

I beleive the church of Scientology has the same grading set up as the OTO...... Hubbard ripped it off


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
26/12/2010 8:14 am  

I read Dietnetics as a kid and it has some good points. But, thankfully I had read some T.D. Suzuki before that and recognized Dietnetics as warmed over Zen Buddhism. Luckily, Zen was 98% cheaper at the time so I went with the
Basho Koans. But hey, if you're a movie star you don't have a lot of free time to be looking around libraries for raindrop poetry.


ReplyQuote
alysa
(@alysa)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 648
14/08/2011 11:17 pm  

Just wish to mention that there's out a new (important) book with relation to Scientology, it's title is "Inside Scientology" and it's written by Janet Reitman, it's about it's history, members and ex-members.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 4092
15/08/2011 1:21 am  
"alysa" wrote:
Just wish to mention that there's out a new (important) book with relation to Scientology, it's title is "Inside Scientology" and it's written by Janet Reitman, it's about it's history, members and ex-members.

And what makes this new book "important" ?

Thelemites should be aware that there is an antagonism between "Thelema" and "Scientology." It probably started when Hubbard ran off with Parsons' money. He was to use the $28,000 that was fetched from the sale of Agape Lodge for a "partnership" but he did other things and soon Dianetics was born (out of the coffers of Agape Lodge, so to speak).

Most of us know what goes on inside Scientology (or do we?). Some call it brainwashing - the really real intentional kind.

Solar Lodge and Hubbard's gang met on the Kurukshetra a few times. The story rolled along right into the mid-90's when a certain, high-ranking city official (a former front-door Solar Lodge Member who was also an Intelligence Agent and who diligently followed the inside track of Scientology for decades) came into direct formal contact with high-ranking members of Scientology. In the City of the Angels, of course, where Horus held his war (among other venues).

I mean. I'm just dropping crumbs here, but those who have studied Scientology in any way or exposé or inside their "way," sort of knows what I'm talking about.

Solar Lodge used to perform "de-cultization deprogramming" on people who escaped. At a certain early grade level, in order to advance, you had to WORK FOR a member of the Church (of Scientology) and you had to RENT FROM a member of the Church. If you acted uppity in any way, that is, became recalcitrant, you immediately lost your job and were evicted from your abode. This was all enforced by Church of Scientology Private Police who wore jumpsuits and hard helmets and jackboots, carrying chromed batons the size of a small baseball bat. This early grade level was "4" about half-way up the ladder to "Clear." Above that were 7 or 9 levels of O.T. ("Operating Thetan"). These were the scary guys.

We helped out the escapees, sometimes with guided LSD, but we never programmed any one of them, for not a one ever entered Solar Lodge. We were (on rare occasions) running sort of an emergency service on the astral plane. Our bookstore, The Eye of Horus, sat only half a block away from the Church's central HQ. We never went looking for them; they escaped and came our way.

What about the time a dozen Solar Lodge initiates infiltrated the Church - each one operating under a full dose of LSD and charged with Magickal Rites? "I invoke, I greet, your presence, O Ra-Hoor-Khuit!" Great magickal times and really-high, high adventure. The results were hilarious. What about the Church's alleged member who penetrated Solar Lodge to the tune of a Minerval degree? He went on to be the PRIME WITNESS who started the Manson-OTO-Solar Lodge Myth by giving this false info to Ed Sanders (for the first edition of The Family) - which was later retracted but caused lawyers to be busy and threw tarnish upon the impeccable image of Solar Lodge 😆
- details forthcoming in Behind the Veil

Anyway, other than what is already obvious, and what I have told new just above, what is it about being Inside Scientology that's "important?"

Maybe a brief review by yourself or a reader, or a link to this mystical tome, will tell us what's so important, and we'll see if we bring the book home.


ReplyQuote
alysa
(@alysa)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 648
15/08/2011 2:16 am  

Think the book may be of importance to people who do not already know enough of the subject of Scientology as you and other people of Solar Lodge do, I know a little bit of Scientology for example, but feel that I might know not enough of it ready, so I saw this book advertised on Fields website and read a little bit of what I might expect from it, and thought it interesting enough for me, to probably buy it and also found it worth enough to mention it's existence here on Lashtal. The website www.janetreitman.com might probably give more answers, the book may make itself important to me and probably other people as well, in the sense that it might throw new light on Scientology that I, and others probably haven't seen before, I mean the book might not be of importance for those who have a sympathic look on L. Ron Hubbard and other Scientologists, but it might be important in another way!


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
15/08/2011 2:30 am  

Shiva, does any imagery, or paraphernalia, exist of the bookstore "Eye of Horus" that you mention Solar Lodge had?

Also, I'm surprised Scientology was already so well established by then as to be such a potent cult.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 4092
15/08/2011 3:19 am  
"Noctifer" wrote:
Shiva, does any imagery, or paraphernalia, exist of the bookstore "Eye of Horus" that you mention Solar Lodge had?

Well, I could give you a Google (is the Borg) Earth shot of the building on tenth (?) street showing the roof of The Eye of Horus and the Church's HQ right down the street ... if you or anybody else would be interested. I think the buildings are still there. If you want it, tell me and then I'll get it, and I'll do it in a timely or liesurely way. This high-tech satellite snooping is serious stuff.

Perhaps you missed this shot of the bookstore when it moved to Blythe ... where the real fun began:

"Noctifer" wrote:
Also, I'm surprised Scientology was already so well established by then as to be such a potent cult.

You must understand this clearly: This was the era of "Fair Game." They had a policy that said, when one was declared Fair Game, any other member could do ANYTHING whatsoever to that poor person - without incurring blame or guilt, like it says in the I Ching. The standard, operating "ANYTHING" always seemed to involve a .45 caliber pistol, the semi-official logo of its day. Under pressure from the Establishment, the Church finally stopped the announcement of Fair Game.
What else can I tell you? You though The Godfather was some sort of a trip? We were going head-to-head with the most dangerous lunatics in our neighborhood. And, oh yes, it was 1967-68, right in the heart of the sixties, right in the heart of L.A., and they controlled blocks of owned or rented territory. they owned ALL the three-story apartment buildings in the neighborhood.

Don't you wish you could have been there?


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 915
15/08/2011 3:32 am  
"Shiva" wrote:
Don't you wish you could have been there?

Oh, yes !

"arson archbishop makes the deserts burn
the dead are grateful ("all you need is love")
fat Buddhas smiling with the widest grin
candy floss surgeon with the golden hair
a brand new process for a brand new age
a black Messiah wearing buckskin boots
Beausoleil, assassin creepy-crawls through Hebron's Vale"

sigh..

Wish I coulda been there for the six six sixties 🙂 I will just have to make due with the heavily packaged and talasmanic 10's **grins**

GREAT picture Shiva! I'd love to see the Google Earth image as well when time permits. I loved the GPS aspect of your book!


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 4092
15/08/2011 4:36 am  

This shows the lay of the land, even as it was in that day:

Here was the home of The Eye:

It's a Mexican Thift Shop today.

Peek around the corner - that's where they were ...

This has been the ten-cent tour of a forgotten location - a minor collision near the crossroads of time.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
15/08/2011 5:55 am  

For a fictional account of the Beginings of Scientology, read The Process by Brion Gysin. It's fiction, but based on actual people and events, and the parts dealing with "Grammatology" are quite close to the bone. The scenes in New York where Thay Himmer perfects the techniques of GRAMMA parallel John Starr Cooke's experiences with Dianetics in 1950. Cooke/Himmer is whisked off to Geneva by Mary Oser/Mya Strangleblood, wife of Peter Oser/PP Strangleblood the great-grandson of John D Rockefeller/the richest little boy in the world where he runs the household with GRAMMA/Dianetics principles. The Process details the "Hello, yes, hello" routine of Scientology. Interestingly, while Gysin was writing on The Process, William Burroughs was working alongside Paul McCartney in his studio on the "Hello, yes, hello" tapes.


ReplyQuote
Keith418
(@keith418)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 127
15/08/2011 5:57 am  

Has anyone read through the entirety of Philadelphia Doctorate Course? It's pretty interesting.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
22/02/2012 9:12 pm  

A useful piece from Scientology watcher and editor of The Village Voice, Tony Ortega: Scientology and the Occult: Hugh Urban's New Exploration of L. Ron Hubbard and Aleister Crowley which reviews and details the Ohio State professor's newly published article "The Occult Roots of Scientology?: L. Ron Hubbard, Aleister Crowley, and the Origins of a Controversial New Religion" within the pages of the academic journal Nova Religio.
http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2012/02/scientology_and_4.php

Zymotic


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
22/02/2012 11:11 pm  
"zymotic" wrote:
A useful piece from Scientology watcher and editor of The Village Voice, Tony Ortega: Scientology and the Occult: Hugh Urban's New Exploration of L. Ron Hubbard and Aleister Crowley which reviews and details the Ohio State professor's newly published article "The Occult Roots of Scientology?: L. Ron Hubbard, Aleister Crowley, and the Origins of a Controversial New Religion" within the pages of the academic journal Nova Religio.
http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2012/02/scientology_and_4.php

Zymotic

This is good Zymotic, thank you. Until recently I thought that the origins of many of L. Ron's ideas were widely understood, but that apparently is not the case.


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2208
30/09/2013 7:29 am  

This thread is so old I can't even remember if I responded as such in it already, but here goes anyway :

Dianetics only works because as human social beings we have an innate need to express ourselves, and what we see as our short-comings and 'sins,'  This was even inculcated and taught in two lineages I have been seriously, but informally a part of for some years: Daoism and Toltec sorcery.

In Daoism (in particular the Korean Qi-Gong I was in) emphasis is placed on the energetic body, and qi, as we here all know, and any stagnation can largely be attributed not just to physical diet, illness, exercise or lack thereof, or bad habits, but also to emotional hangups and 'memories.'  Any event in life that is extremely positive or negative generally leaves some energy 'stuck' and in that group we wrote down a list going back in time to recapitulate and relive the moments.  Then we would release that energy in crying or laughing or what have you.  It really worked wonders.  This is the same recapitulation that is done in Toltec sorcery.  I think LRH just stole these techniques as well as a more 'scientific' version from psychoanalysis , while on the other hand vilifying psychiatry.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 1688
04/10/2013 3:25 pm  

There are several expressions of Elron’s apparent ongoing rapturous enthusiasm – bordering on adulatory fervour even – regarding the words of The Beast.  His son Nibs reports him handling books and manuscript material with much reverence, while his “Philadelphia Lectures” refer glowingly to A.C. in favourable terms - which completely contradicts the 1969 London Sunday Times’ et al. claim that he was acting with the O.T.O. as some sort of a U.S. Government fifth columnist agent.

Therefore had A.C. lived another five years until 1952, it’s not inconceivable at all that L.R.H. might have made contact with him direct & then been willing to divert a significant portion of the fortune immediately accruing from the profits of Dianetics® (“The Modern Science of Mental Health”) to the Prophet himself.  By such a “chelastic ” divvying-up of the proceeds, he would in effect himself have become the “rich man from the West” (Liber AL III.31), settling A.C.’s debts little and big (e.g., laundry bills and bankruptcy) and funding his publishing programme to help at least set out before the public all of his outstanding pending works (Aleph, Confessions, Magick Without Tears, Bagh-i-Muattur, etc., etc.) years ahead of when they finally appeared (or are even now still pending, in some other cases.)

I don’t think  Elron would have tried the ‘usual confidence trick’ with Uncle Al, and by the time of A.C.'s death his (L.R.H.'s) sometime magical partner Jack Parsons had long since himself fallen out of favour himself with Crowley for being a “lout”.  (Crowley did not seem to have an enormously high opinion of the Californians as a whole, apart from Jane Wolfe, Roy Leffingwell, the Burlingames & maybe just one or two others - rather offhandedly dismissing the rest of them as his shallow “fans” rather than sincere magickal students.)

Knowing the potentially highly volatile temperament of both men, together with their recognized capacity for argument & disagreeability, it’s a fairly safe bet also that they would come to a parting of the ways later on (pace Yorke, Regardie, Mudd, Fuller, etc., etc.) but not before Elron would have duly come to play out his part in the great drama.  Maybe he might even have been made a Saint in the Gnostic Mass out of gratitude!?!

This is mainly of course supposition; however, in the final reckoning Aiwass ≠ Xenu!
Norma N. Joy Conquest


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
06/10/2013 11:12 pm  

Weren't they both Rosicrucians?


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 4092
07/10/2013 12:08 am  
"Magickal" wrote:
Weren't they both Rosicrucians?

Both of whom?

And ... The Rosicrucians were around in the 1600s.

"Rosicrucianism is a generic term referring to studies or membership within a philosophical secret society said to have been founded in late medieval Germany by Christian Rosenkreuz."

"During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, various groups styled themselves Rosicrucian. The diverse groups who link themselves to a "Rosicrucian Tradition" can be divided into three categories: Esoteric Christian Rosicrucian groups, which profess Christ; Masonic Rosicrucian groups such as Societas Rosicruciana; and initiatory groups such as the Golden Dawn and the Ancient Mystical Order Rosae Crucis (AMORC)."

- Quotes from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosicrucianism#Modern_groups

AMORC was based on an OTO charter from Reuss (or, according to some accounts, Reuss's widow).


ReplyQuote
Page 3 / 5
Share: